Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[Seawytch]

It's just part of their heterosexual mating behavior. No male fish ever fertilized the "eggs" of another male fish.

Interestingly enough, the science says it is homosexual behavior.

Hmmm, no. Ideological cranks say that.

Actually the title of the fucking thing is:

Homosexual behaviour increases male attractiveness to females

Stop lying.

Ever go to a strip club? And two of the dancers are exceptionally close to each other? Skin on skin, lips on skin, tits on skin, ass to ass, Vejay to vejay...maybe even more going on? Yeah, that's a lesbian act being performed for the sake of it's heterosexual male clientele.

No, that's just an attempt to bilk the suckers of their cash.

Of course it is, that's why I used the word "clientele" rather than "mate" or "partner". Are you going to tell me that lesbian acts are not committed on and off stage at a strip club? Pshaw.

Some queer biologist calls fish behavior "homosexual" and you think we're all just supposed to fall down and believe it without question?

I don't think I much care if fish are gay or not . . . since I'm not a fish. That would make it . . . what's the word? Irrelevant.

There are animals, lots of them, who naturally engage in cannibalism, but I'm pretty sure no one advocates us practicing that as natural behavior ourselves. At least, I hope not.

Sorry bigots, but you don't get to play the "it's not natural" card and then when it is shown to be prevalent in nature, play the "some animals are cannibals" card.

 

[RKMBrown]

What argument? That it isn't anyones business what people do in the bedroom but keep harping about it?

The argument was...

Yes or no Pop23 The governments compelling interest in denying same sex siblings is: 2) Harm to a child who gets married to a family member through parent and / or sibling influence. Children should be allowed the opportunity to find a marriage outside the family. The opportunity to raise children if they so desire. Parents and / or siblings can have a powerful influence on children. A Father telling his little girl that she will be his wife when she is of age and home tutoring her...? That's sick. There is a bond between family members that should not be exploited for sex. That you do not UNDERSTAND THIS makes you sound like a really really sick person.

I did, you need to rebutt, but you won't.

The basis of your argument just doesn't work unless you want to use ancient moral norms. You just want to redefine ideas that fit your need.

Tell me RK, how does two sibling heterosexual males marrying fit into your definition of incest.

1. They're heterosexual which means they do not have sex with males.

2. They only want the financial benefits that come with marrige, nothing physical involved. Lower income tax rates, married partner insurance benefits, multi car insurance discount and possibly, by combining income, better mortgage terms.

Explain to everyone the compelling interest the state would have in denying this couple the benefits that come with marriage.

And the goal posts are moved yet again.

Now POPs wants the compelling interest in blocking "heterosexual" male "siblings" from marrying just to get tax breaks. ROFL Your strawman is full of shit POP why don't you send me a list of people who got married just for tax breaks. I'll wait.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

 

[Redfish]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

 

[bodecea]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

Then, submit your constitutional amendment.

 

[RKMBrown]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

 

[Pop23]

Arguing tradition is such a yesterday thing to do.

What is the compelling state interest in allowing a same sex sibling couple the benefit of starting a new familial unit?

Answer? None I can think of, except tradition of course.

It has already been pointed out to you that Constitutionally you cannot grant civil marriage only to same sex siblings. It has been pointed out to you that gay couples seek the legal protections of a family, granted by a civil marriage license and that those protections already exist within familial relationships like siblings.

If you think you still have valid legal grounds for a challenge, go for it, but you're spamming because you're a bigot. We all know it, you should just own it.

Can't until the ruling of the court. Then there is no compelling state reason to deny same sex sibling marriage.

I love the traditional familial status argument. Like the traditional family = Husband and Wife at a minimum, the upcoming ruling blows that sucker OUT OF THE WATER!

Gonna be fun

Please provide a link to the same sex sibling marriage case that the SCOTUS is reviewing. Or are you a liar?

Can't. Same sex sibling cases can't become eligible until after SSM is codified. It is, after all, the opening act to this multi act play.

This is gonna be interesting.

You and I both will be long gone and buried before the incest laws are thrown out with the bath water.

RK, I started this SSSM discussion because it is a troubling issue.

Check out the thread I just started in current events with my compromise marriage proposal.

I think, maybe just wishful thinking, that solved this, and many other problems.

 

[Redfish]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

 

[RKMBrown]

It has already been pointed out to you that Constitutionally you cannot grant civil marriage only to same sex siblings. It has been pointed out to you that gay couples seek the legal protections of a family, granted by a civil marriage license and that those protections already exist within familial relationships like siblings.

If you think you still have valid legal grounds for a challenge, go for it, but you're spamming because you're a bigot. We all know it, you should just own it.

Can't until the ruling of the court. Then there is no compelling state reason to deny same sex sibling marriage.

I love the traditional familial status argument. Like the traditional family = Husband and Wife at a minimum, the upcoming ruling blows that sucker OUT OF THE WATER!

Gonna be fun

Please provide a link to the same sex sibling marriage case that the SCOTUS is reviewing. Or are you a liar?

Can't. Same sex sibling cases can't become eligible until after SSM is codified. It is, after all, the opening act to this multi act play.

This is gonna be interesting.

You and I both will be long gone and buried before the incest laws are thrown out with the bath water.

RK, I started this SSSM discussion because it is a troubling issue.

Check out the thread I just started in current events with my compromise marriage proposal.

I think, maybe just wishful thinking, that solved this, and many other problems.

Please provide a link to one same sex sibling couple that is trying to get married or complaining that they are not allowed to get married.

 

[Seawytch]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Indeed Chickenfish...a majority of the SCOTUS voted for the right of interracial couples to marry...and will soon vote in a majority for the gays.

 

[RKMBrown]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

 

[Redfish]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

 

[RKMBrown]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

Are you actually saying you want a law that blocks blind people from getting married? WTF is wrong with you?

How is stopping gays from getting married in a loving relationship between two consenting adults, the same as blind drivers heading out onto highways and slaughtering people?

Being bigoted against blacks is the same as being bigoted against gays. The only reason you got away with it in both cases was that they were minority groups that jerks like you could pick on.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

denying and disparaging the privileges and immunities of the several and sovereign citizens in the several and sovereign States requires due process or bills of attainder.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

It is about the communist Right wanting to use socialism to compel Persons to obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any any willful signatories. Is it any wonder some on the left are practicing being better poets and know it.

 

[Redfish]

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

Are you actually saying you want a law that blocks blind people from getting married? WTF is wrong with you?

How is stopping gays from getting married in a loving relationship between two consenting adults, the same as blind drivers heading out onto highways and slaughtering people?

Being bigoted against blacks is the same as being bigoted against gays. The only reason you got away with it in both cases was that they were minority groups that jerks like you could pick on.

I said: is it discrimination to deny blind people the right to drive cars? is your reading comprehension damaged by too much cheap vodka last night?

I am not bigoted against gays, I want gays to have a way to legally commit to each other in such a way that gives them the same rights as married couples. But a gay union is not a marriage any more than a legal union of same sex siblings is a marriage.

 

[Redfish]

Only the Communist Right wants to use Socialism to compel obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any willful signatories.

wrong, we want the people to decide these kinds of things. we want the people to be able to vote their beliefs in each state of via a constitutional amendment.

Since the constitution is silent on gay marriage, it is not right that 9 old farts in black robes decide something that affects 300 million people.

Let the people decide. I will accept the will of the people, will you?

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

It is about the communist Right wanting to use socialism to compel Persons to obedience to morals from the Age of Iron without any any willful signatories. Is it any wonder some on the left are practicing being better poets and know it.

Thats really funny coming from someone who wants the government to mandate what people must believe and think. You want thought control as long as the govt mandates YOUR thoughts, you leftists have no idea what you are asking for.

 

[RKMBrown]

No. This country is not about harming people by the will of the majority.

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

Are you actually saying you want a law that blocks blind people from getting married? WTF is wrong with you?

How is stopping gays from getting married in a loving relationship between two consenting adults, the same as blind drivers heading out onto highways and slaughtering people?

Being bigoted against blacks is the same as being bigoted against gays. The only reason you got away with it in both cases was that they were minority groups that jerks like you could pick on.

I said: is it discrimination to deny blind people the right to drive cars? is your reading comprehension damaged by too much cheap vodka last night?

I am not bigoted against gays, I want gays to have a way to legally commit to each other in such a way that gives them the same rights as married couples. But a gay union is not a marriage any more than a legal union of same sex siblings is a marriage.

So you were not comparing gays to blind people, you were comparing marriage licences to driving licenses? You know the privilege of driving on public roads is not the same as the right to life and marriage right?

You know a civil union is not a marriage right?

 

[Redfish]

minority rights were, and are, established by majority vote. No one is harmed if the people of each state decide whether to sanction gay marriage. If you are gay and want to marry someone of the same sex, move to a state that allows it.

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

Are you actually saying you want a law that blocks blind people from getting married? WTF is wrong with you?

How is stopping gays from getting married in a loving relationship between two consenting adults, the same as blind drivers heading out onto highways and slaughtering people?

Being bigoted against blacks is the same as being bigoted against gays. The only reason you got away with it in both cases was that they were minority groups that jerks like you could pick on.

I said: is it discrimination to deny blind people the right to drive cars? is your reading comprehension damaged by too much cheap vodka last night?

I am not bigoted against gays, I want gays to have a way to legally commit to each other in such a way that gives them the same rights as married couples. But a gay union is not a marriage any more than a legal union of same sex siblings is a marriage.

So you were not comparing gays to blind people, you were comparing marriage licences to driving licenses? You know the privilege of driving on public roads is not the same as the right to life and marriage right?

You know a civil union is not a marriage right?

So you admit that its all about the word and not about equality, rights, discrimination, or anything else. Its about using govt to force societal change to fit your minority views.

and you call that democracy?????

 

[RKMBrown]

Incorrect, discriminating against minorities is against the Constitution. How about if we decide that everyone your age is to be put in a home for the elderly for your own good, and that all of your assets are to be confiscated to pay for it? Why not, after-all your are in the minority? Right?

Why stop with harming gays by not letting them get married? Why not the irish too? Why not put the ban in for interracial marriages again? Hey let's bring back Jim Crow laws, they are only harming blacks and well those blacks are just a small minority that seem to go to jail alot. Let the states decide, right?

blind people are a minority too. is it discrimination to not allow them to drive cars?

and mixing race into this only defeats your arguments, race and homosexuality are not analogous.

Are you actually saying you want a law that blocks blind people from getting married? WTF is wrong with you?

How is stopping gays from getting married in a loving relationship between two consenting adults, the same as blind drivers heading out onto highways and slaughtering people?

Being bigoted against blacks is the same as being bigoted against gays. The only reason you got away with it in both cases was that they were minority groups that jerks like you could pick on.

I said: is it discrimination to deny blind people the right to drive cars? is your reading comprehension damaged by too much cheap vodka last night?

I am not bigoted against gays, I want gays to have a way to legally commit to each other in such a way that gives them the same rights as married couples. But a gay union is not a marriage any more than a legal union of same sex siblings is a marriage.

So you were not comparing gays to blind people, you were comparing marriage licences to driving licenses? You know the privilege of driving on public roads is not the same as the right to life and marriage right?

You know a civil union is not a marriage right?

So you admit that its all about the word and not about equality, rights, discrimination, or anything else. Its about using govt to force societal change to fit your minority views.

and you call that democracy?????

We don't live in a democracy, thank god, we live in a constitutional republic.

No, civil union is not the same as marriage. What makes you think civil union means marriage? There are thousands of different laws regarding marriage. Civil unions is not the same as marriage, because those thousands of laws regarding marriage do not apply.

The only government force that's been going on around here is majority groups pissing on minorities. Protecting a minority from a bully is not force, it's defense. Your argument is akin to saying a cop stopping a rape is force cause the rapist was stronger than his victim, so the victim deserved it.